Jane Dern v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. , 707 F. App'x 174 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-1959
    JANE DERN,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, d/b/a Safeco Insurance Company
    of America,
    Defendant - Appellee,
    v.
    SASSCER, CLAGETT & BUCHER,
    Party-in-Interest.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
    George Jarrod Hazel, District Judge. (8:15-cv-01737-GJH)
    Submitted: December 21, 2017                              Decided: December 27, 2017
    Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jane Dern, Appellant Pro Se. Kayleigh Toth Keilty, Patricia McHugh Lambert, PESSIN
    KATZ LAW, P.A., Towson, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Jane Dern seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying her motion to reopen
    her case. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was
    not timely filed.
    Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or
    order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the
    appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R.
    App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional
    requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 
    551 U.S. 205
    , 214 (2007).
    The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 22, 2017. The notice
    of appeal was filed on August 16, 2017. Because Dern failed to file a timely notice of
    appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed
    in forma pauperis, grant Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, and dismiss the appeal.
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
    process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-1959

Citation Numbers: 707 F. App'x 174

Judges: Duncan, Hamilton, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 12/27/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024